bookshelf_get_rename

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The readOnlyHint annotation is complemented by the 'List' verb, and the description adds behavioral specificity by explaining the output is a preview of files that would be renamed. This tells the agent the operation is non-mutating and what the return data represents.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The entire description is one sentence with a parenthetical clarifier, containing no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple (two optional parameters, read-only) and an output schema is present, so the description sufficiently covers the operation's semantics. It explains the preview context, which is the main non-obvious behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description maps book_id to 'book' and author_id to 'author' from the description's 'for an author or book', which is essential since the schema lacks descriptions. It does not address optionality or what happens when both or neither are provided, but the core parameter meaning is clarified.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource: proposed renames for an author or book. It also clarifies the output is files that would be renamed on the next rename task, which distinguishes this preview tool from actual rename operations.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool over siblings like bookshelf_get_retag or the actual rename command. The phrase 'next rename task' implies its use as a preview, but no alternatives or exclusions are stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.